Voter disenfranchisement bill becomes law

SB 518 places undue burdens on the initiative and referendum process in the name of “integrity.”

April 24, 2024‍

A bill that disenfranchises Oklahoma voters by placing undue burdens on their constitutionally guaranteed right to propose laws through the initiative and referendum process was signed into law by Governor Kevin Stitt on April 23.

“Oklahoma is one of twenty-six states with the power of direct democracy. It allows regular Oklahomans to shape and influence policy when they feel like they can’t get something done through this Legislature,” said Representative Mickey Dollens while debating SB 518 on the House floor on April 17. “Bills like this continue to make it even more burdensome and difficult for ordinary Oklahomans to make change.”

The House sponsor, Representative Mark Lepak, argued the bill was written to ensure integrity in the state’s initiative and referendum process. Lepak neglected to cite specific cases of documented fraud, only saying that the Legislature has the right as mandated by the state constitution to pass laws “to prevent corruption in making, procuring, and submitting initiative and referendum petitions.”

SB 518 changes the ballot measure process in three ways. It gives the Secretary of State the authority to charge up to a $750 filing fee to submit ballot measures. There were none, prior. The law increases the two protest periods for opponents to challenge either a measure’s constitutionality or the validity of its signatures from ten to twenty business days. Lastly, the law increases the number of signature data points that must match voter registration records from three to four. Data points include a voter’s legal first and last name (which may differ from the name on their voter registration), their house number, and the month and day of their birth.

A misspelled word or a transposed number on a petition form could cause a signature to be invalidated. Of the 135 initiatives run nationwide between 2017 – 2023, the average validity rate was 77.33 percent, according to Ballotpedia, a political research website. To get a constitutional amendment on the ballot in Oklahoma, proponents would have to collect approximately 230,000 signatures in ninety days to ensure they get the 172,993 valid signatures needed to qualify.

SB 518 included an emergency clause that was approved by two-thirds of the Legislature, meaning the law went into effect as soon as Stitt signed it. Any future initiatives or referenda put forward must adhere to the tenants of the law.

Representative Ellyn Hefner said she has a disabled son whose writing would not fit within the constraints of a petition form. “This bill is something that could be taking away someone’s voice, their civil rights.”

Representative Monroe Nichols pushed back at Lepak’s assertion that the process needed more integrity. “We’re not taking power away from people who would maybe use it to do nefarious things. You’re stripping it away from teachers. You’re stripping it away from people who live in communities that don’t have the resources and time to come up here and lobby us,” Nichols said. “You’re stripping it away from people who simply just want the state to work a little better than it does today, and you’re doing it without any justification to show that it is necessary.”

Our Take‍

When you make the initiative and referendum process more difficult, you take it away from grassroots citizens and give it to special interest groups who have the money, organization, and influence to pass ballot measures.

Besides giving Oklahoma such progressive laws as medical marijuana and Medicaid expansion, the initiative has also been used to turn conservative ideas into law, such as legislative term limits, popular votes for tax increases, and the creation of the Oklahoma Ethics Commission.

Oklahoma’s ballot measure process is already the strictest in the nation, with the shortest signature gathering period at ninety days and the highest per capita signature requirement for initiated constitutional amendments, tied with Arizona. Here, a few special interest groups oppose the initiative and referendum process for fear that Oklahoma citizens will pass laws thwarting their own political agendas, but rather than advocating against a proposed law based on its merits, they would rather kill the entire process.

Oklahoma’s founding fathers wrote the state constitution based on populist principals and the belief that protections should be put in place to protect our state from an overzealous Legislature corrupted by industry, religion, or a wealthy ruling class.

Maybe they were on to something.

____________________